What It's Like to Be Sentenced in DC's Federal Courthouse During COVID-19 Pandemic
Most proceedings at the D.C. trial court have been postponed due to the pandemic. But attorneys for one criminal defendant urged he be resentenced quickly, as it could allow him to be quickly released from federal prison.
March 25, 2020 at 05:21 PM
6 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
Charles Hall's sentencing Wednesday at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia was supposed to happen last Friday.
But Chief Judge Beryl Howell postponed it until May under the court's COVID-19 policy, a move that sent Hall's attorneys scrambling to get him out of the federal detention center as soon as possible, citing the same pandemic that the judge invoked to delay the hearing.
Hall's attorneys, a clinic team from Georgetown Law, quickly pushed back, filing a memorandum with the court Thursday waiving their client's right to be physically present and said Hall would appear through videoconference instead. Making the matter even more urgent, they said, was the possibility that Hall could be released from the federal prison in Loretto, Pennsylvania, imminently, as he had already served much of the sentence federal prosecutors were requesting.
So when Howell opened the sentencing hearing for Hall Wednesday, the judge, the only party physically present in the courtroom, began with an explanation of the "legal dispute" over whether a federal sentence can be handed down over videoconference.
She said that ultimately, under precedent set by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, she believed the sentencing could be held in this format. Howell then asked Hall a series of questions about whether he understood he was giving up certain rights, such as being able to assist attorneys in the questioning of any potential witnesses, by not being in the room. No witnesses appeared at the hearing, which Howell acknowledged in her question.
Hall, appearing on several screens placed throughout the courtroom, said he spoke with his attorneys over the phone "on several occasions" about waiving his right to be physically present, and that he fully understood his rights and what was happening.
Hall's case was a resentencing, as he had already been sentenced to 24 years in prison after a trial in a mortgage fraud case in 2006. He appealed his case, and the D.C. Circuit reversed one of his convictions. On another appeal, the circuit remanded the case for resentencing.
Howell, in her order setting the hearing, "highly encouraged" attorneys to attend through the phone conference. Over the phone on Wednesday, Assistant U.S. Attorney Virginia Cheatham asked the judge to resentence Hall to a minimum of 188 months.
She also asked that a number of conditions be placed on Hall's supervised release, which she suggested last for five years. Cheatham said Hall had not shown remorse during his initial sentencing in 2006, and noted that he had been convicted of felonies before facing these charges.
"I worry we will see this man again," Cheatham said.
Hall's counsel, led by Erica Hashimoto, said he had accumulated enough good time credit that he would be eligible for home confinement if sentenced to the requested 188 months. But she argued that, in light of the pandemic and the possibility that it could spread quickly through a prison population, Hall should be sentenced to time served. That would allow him to avoid some procedural hurdles that would delay his release, Hashimoto said.
Howell then asked Cheatham to weigh in, noting the "extraordinary circumstances" created by the pandemic. She said it may benefit the Bureau of Prisons to have fewer individuals in its custody during the health crisis.
Cheatham said she was only authorized to advocate for the 188-month sentence. "Personally, I understand and I am sympathetic," she added.
Hall, in delivering his allocution, directed his remarks to Cheatham. He said he understood her concerns about his lack of remorse in the past and over his multiple convictions, but said he is now a changed man.
Getting emotional at times, Hall said he has spent time in prison studying law and helping fellow inmates. He said he now wants "to dedicate the rest of my life to try to help others."
Howell said the crimes Hall was convicted of were "very serious." However, she said she could tell that Hall has made "significant strides" in the years since his original sentencing, and that he showed remorse in a letter submitted to the court.
And she sided with Hall's counsel, sentencing him to time served and three years of supervised release. But the judge warned Hall that if he should "mess up" and violate the terms of his release, she will see him back in court. "And that will be a sad day," Howell added.
The hearing was not without technical issues: Hall was twice dropped from the call, once at the start of Cheatham's remarks on his sentencing, and as Howell was preparing to hand down the sentence. The issues did not seem to stem from the D.C. court.
The court's IT staffer was not in the courtroom at the time of the issues, but was summoned both times. At the first instance, the federal prison was able to quickly reestablish the connection, and Cheatham continued on.
But the second stretch lasted for more than 20 minutes. "Sometimes this works like a charm, this is more interruptions than usual," Howell said.
Howell ordered earlier this month that most criminal and civil proceedings in the D.C. Circuit be halted, in light of the public health recommendations made to minimize the spread of the coronavirus. Only court personnel, those required to attend proceedings or members of the media are now allowed in the courthouse.
But essential court hearings are continuing on in the otherwise quiet building, largely with defendants housed at the D.C. jail or through phone conferences with counsel. Howell herself has two more hearings scheduled for Thursday.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllContract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readFlorida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250